The Impact of Patent Disclosure Quality on Sustainable Innovation: A Qualitative Review of the Role of Patent Examiners
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70142/ijbge.v2i2.352Keywords:
Patent Disclosure Quality, Sustainable Innovation, Patent Examiners, Review Literacy, Innovation PolicyAbstract
This study aims to explore the influence of patent disclosure quality on sustainable innovation with a focus on the role of patent examiners. Through a qualitative literature review approach, this study analyzes previous studies that discuss the relationship between patent disclosure and sustainable innovation. The results show that high-quality patent disclosure can enhance collaboration between parties involved in the innovation process, as well as provide information needed for further technology development. The role of patent examiners is crucial in ensuring that the disclosure meets the required standards, thus supporting a more sustainable innovation process. Thus, this study underlines the importance of effective patent disclosure management and recommendations for policies that support sustainable innovation. These findings are expected to contribute to the understanding of the relationship between patent disclosure quality and sustainable innovation and encourage further research in this area
References
Baruffaldi, SH, & Simeth, A. (2020). Patents and knowledge diffusion: the effects of early disclosure . Research Policy, 49(3), 103906.
Boulton, M., et al. (2018). Developing a qualitative approach to systematic literature reviews: A study protocol . Research Methods in Psychology, 14(1), 1-14.https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244018774164
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology . Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Devlin, H. (2009). The misunderstood function of disclosure in patent law . Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 22(2), 1-49.
Denzin, N. K. (2017). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods . Routledge.
Dyer, T.A., Glaeser, S., Lang, M.H., & Sprecher, C. (2024). The effect of patent disclosure quality on innovation . Journal of Accounting and Economics, 77(2–3), 101647.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2023.101647
Fischer, H., W.K., & S.B. (2019). The role of patent examiners in the quality of patent applications . Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 14(3), 175-185.
Frenz, M., & Ietto-Gillies, G. (2021). The role of patents in innovation: An analysis of UK firms . Research Policy, 50(2), 104205.
Gambardella, A., Giuri, P., & Mariani, M. (2011). The social value of patent disclosure . LMU Munich.
Geissdoerfer, M., Morioka, S.N., de Carvalho, M.M., & Evans, S. (2018). The circular economy – A new sustainability agenda ? Journal of Cleaner Production, 190, 243-254.
Glaeser, S., et al. (2022). The effects of proprietary information on corporate disclosure and transparency: evidence from trade secrets . Journal of Accounting and Economics, 63(3), 101436.
Hanlon, M., et al. (2022). Examining the variation in patent examiner behavior and its impact on patent quality . Journal of Accounting Research, 60(5), 1255-1280.
Hegde, D., & others. (2023). The innovation consequences of mandatory patent disclosures . Journal of Accounting and Economics, 77(2-3), 101647.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2023.101647
Hsu, H., & Kuo, L. (2016). The impact of patent disclosure quality on innovation performance: Evidence from Taiwan's manufacturing industry . Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 112, 72-80.
Jabareen, Y. (2009). Building a conceptual framework: Philosophy, definitions, and procedures . International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(4), 49-62.
https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690900800404
Keller, W. (2020). International Technology Diffusion . Journal of Economic Literature, 58(4), 903-948.
Lemley, M. A. (2012). Intellectual property rights and the incentives to innovate . University of California, Berkeley.
Li, X., & Liu, H. (2020). The relationship between patent disclosure and sustainable innovation: Evidence from China . Journal of Cleaner Production, 255, 120255.
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D.G., & The PRISMA Group. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement . PLOS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide . Blackwell Publishing.
Roin, B. A. (2005). A new perspective on the patent disclosure requirement . Harvard Law Review.
Roychowdhury, S., et al. (2019). The effects of financial reporting and disclosure on corporate investment: a review . Journal of Accounting and Economics, 67(2-3), 152-175.
Scherer, L. (2017). The role of patent examiners in the innovation process: A study of the German patent system . Innovation: Organization & Management, 19(2), 217-229.
Teece, D.J. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation . Long Range Planning, 43(2-3), 172-194.
WIPO. (2021). World Intellectual Property Indicators 2021 . World Intellectual Property Organization.
Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Blackwell Publishing.
Roin, B. A. (2005). A new perspective on the patent disclosure requirement. Harvard Law Review.
Roychowdhury, S., et al. (2019). The effects of financial reporting and disclosure on corporate investment: a review. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 67(2-3), 152-175.
Scherer, L. (2017). The role of patent examiners in the innovation process: A study of the German patent system. Innovation: Organization & Management, 19(2), 217-229.
Teece, D. J. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Planning, 43(2-3), 172-194.
WIPO. (2021). World Intellectual Property Indicators 2021. World Intellectual Property Organization.
